MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficient Uncertainty Quantification of Deterministic Wireless Channel Models Using Polynomial Chaos Expansion

2023· article· en· W4389271838 on OpenAlexaff
Xingqi Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolynomial chaosWirelessComputer scienceChannel (broadcasting)Uncertainty quantificationCHAOS (operating system)PolynomialPolynomial expansionAlgorithmStatistical physicsMathematicsTelecommunicationsStatisticsPhysicsMonte Carlo methodMachine learningMathematical analysisComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Uncertainty in the input specification for deterministic channel models such as ray-tracing introduces variations in the predicted signal strength.This necessitates the quantification and analysis of the impact of input uncertainties on the channel models, as a means of ensuring performance robustness.The polynomial chaos expansion (PCE) method has emerged as a promising uncertainty quantification technique compared to the commonly used yet computationally inefficient Monte Carlo methods.However, PCE-based methods generally suffer from a "curse of dimensionality", where the computational cost increases rapidly with the number of random variables included in the analysis.This paper applies an orthogonal matching pursuit algorithm to mitigate the computational cost of PCE and facilitate the uncertainty analysis of ray-tracing based channel models.The performance is demonstrated in an indoor environment and validated against Monte Carlo simulations and experimental measurements.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.216
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.144 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering DesignFrench-language works237,207